I noticed as I watched the video again after some time away doing other things (90% was done in Feb), that I should have emphasised that this comes from an *air perspective* with abstract animations getting the main points across that are in *original air focused document* . If I was to make this video from a broader perspective - cool idea btw - I would place more emphasis on exploring deep battle in its entirety. Let's pick that up next time

Soviets be like: Attention all pilots! please don't fly into 1 morbillion gun barrage we are about to fire. Thanks for you attention!

I would love more about soviet air doctrine, planes and aviation in general. The air war in the east isn't talked about enough.

My grandfather got strafed by one of these in -44.. He and his friend did not like it one bit.. Grandpa said :"..after that bastard had done three runs on us.. there were two brand new ditches on the meadow.. :D

07:57 ish. The East Germany NVA Luftwaffe also doesnt seem to have had dedicated reconissance aircraft for most of its existence. As far as I read every Pilot was supposed to report on what he saw during his combat mission after returning, or over radio during a mission. Great Video, as always :) 11:59 An ex East German Mil Mi 24 Pilot told me at an event at the MHM Dresden that they had one officer come to them with an idear that they should fly "under" under a artillerie creeping barrage that would have been timed in such a way that it would move forward at the speed of the helicopters. I think it was meant to fascilitate a breaking into the rear of enemy forces for the attack helicopters. The old Heli Pilot told me that they werent that impressed with the idear and said: Nein Danke

Most insane shit is that after successful usage of attack aircraft in WW2, both Soviets and USA completely abandoned the idea because "duh, muh fighters gonna do all the work by themselves". Later down the line they realized that "maybe a specialized aircraft for attacking ground targets would be alright..." and started their SU-25 and A-10 program... after going without real attack crafts for 20 years!

...As a Marine infantryman from the late 1960s, I am hardly a specialist in matters of air power...though I obviously have a greater interest in Close Air Support. From what I gathered more that half a century ago, initially, when a ground unit was in need of all the support that it could get from both artillery and air assets, there was a fear that the former would pose a threat to the latter, and so often the attempt was made to "rotate" their missions...which often became a mess. . ... Later, the impression was that it was not as big a danger as initially feared, and less consideration was allotted to the issue. I'm 75 now, and haven't yet heard an unbiased firm determination.. YP

There must be so much still buried in the archives, digitising the lot will take a very long time if Australia's efforts are a guide. Thanks Chris, this & stuff like the Nebelwerfer v Katyusha efforts are extremely interesting to me. May I ask if it's better for you if we watch it here or on Patreon? Danke aus Australien.

Golden rule of land operations: If you don't own it you're at the mercy of he who does. The difference between having TACON/OPCON of an asset at your level of command (whatever that may be) and having to effectively beg for it at command conferences is huge. This is why seemingly inefficient organisational structures that push assets lower, or duplicate responsibilities (Army aviation is a prime example) is actually really important in practise. This applies whether it is begging for a single UAV at battalion level, through to fast jet support at the JTFHQ level (only to be told 'Nah, got to maintain crew rest ratios...' by the air force LO)

Well researched and analytical. Well done.

Makes me wonder how many other gems like this are in the archives. Then I wonder what Russians who can read the original think of this German English summary. Then ...

Great archive find and great video! Would be nice to see some photos of the document, just to further emphasize the research work you put into this.

The things I learn from you from your archive trips.... a shame so much of modern history docs never bother to do such first hand research. Informative Chris.

Great work, Bismarck, I really enjoyed it!

We did see video where pair of Su25 flew right over Grad when firing and almost get hit. So that attention to arty fire is not misplaced.

First off great video as always!! I have always supported you guys by purchasing all your books. I have every one in English. Unfortunately my german is extremely rough and out of practice. I see some books that only have german versions. Any chance you guys are working on translations into English for those? Keep up the great work!

Another outstanding presentation. Thank You!

Congratulations on improving your accent, your V's especially have improved greatly. Knowing what sounds to improve on is key, right? As an American I focused on getting rid of nasal R's and A's. Germans no longer guess me for an Ami, first guess is usually Dutch, maybe because I'm tall? Anyway, keep up the good work.

Sorry, not related, but would you consider doing a piece on Australia’s air assets in the Vietnam War? Until recently, I had no idea that Australia was involved at all, but apparently it was quite a big deal, both in the air and on the ground. Thanks🙂.

A very insightful and informed analysis. It's fascinating how modern Russian military tactics are often rooted in a legacy that stretches back to WW2.

I really appreciate your content vs that of others who constantly make false and outright incorrect statements purely for click bait and to drive "engagement" by baiting people to correct said errors by replying.

Love those primary sources!

It's ironic. Interdiction might be seen as the more low hanging fruit in terms of soft skinned vehicles etc. but CAS requires more skill to avoid friendly fire and knowledge of exact enemy locations. In some ways the focus on CAS over interdiction might have required greater skill, at the expense of greater risk to it's pilots.

Thaks man. Respect.

Interesting video

RIP to that soldier at 17:18

I emember reading what Erich Hartmann said about this aircraft, you had to almost fill your windscreen and be close to do any real damage.

Thanks for the link from your russian helicopter video, very interesting

oooooh I want those books

Although not directly connected to the Ilyushin IL-2 with 37mm cannons, and your earlier video on the B-25 with a 75mm cannon, however, in regards to operational durability, why wasn’t the MiG-23 able to be structurally strengthened, so as to be capable of firing the 30 mm Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-6-30 rotary cannon, and the 23 mm Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-23 autocannon? Especially noting the history of success with cannon armaments on the IL-2.

Last night i stumbled onto The Pilot on Prime which featured this plane

Please reexamine your audio processing chain. Your audio sounds muffled. Needs to be crisper and have more high frequencies.

This also shows why the U.S.S.R. likes the P39/P63.

The biggest loss of meaning in translation, is the example of the quote “Quantity over Quality”. This is simply not true in the original. In fact, this quote makes no sense at all, due to the loss of the original sense where “at a certain point, the quantitative level shifts to a qualitatively different level”, as “Quantity goes to Quality”.

Thanks Chris for answering a very interesting and important aspect I'd never thought to ask about. The USSR's not getting into strategic bombing as the USA and UK. Not even striking slightly further behind German lines at rail hubs or logistics arteries, and such.

If you're an Il-2 pilot or an A-10 pilot, is it more worthwhile to go after enemy tanks, or IFVs, or artillery, or supply vehicles?

Speaking of flight artillery flight paths and CAS, in War Thunder (ground RB) I've been nailed by an artillery shell at approximately 2k. Only the one time, but that 152mm or 155mm blew my P-63 to smithereens.

Old, but incredible.

Hey, does anybody know where near Gorlitz there is a big east air force musem?

Excellent as always! There’s a lot of debate as to how effective close air support actually was during WW2 but there’s no doubting the psychological effect. I’ve heard there was a very low accuracy rate especially for the Soviets.

Thank you Christoph. Concise and to the point, as usual. Cheers from NZ🇳🇿. P.S. The French word ‘route’ is correctly pronounced the same way in English. Remember … the Yanks comprise considerably less than 50% of the English speaking population of the world😁! Rout is a noun and-in my trade of carpentry-a verb. P.P.S. When our Engineer Squadron carried out Military Demolition Training, sometimes as part of Civil Aid tasks, we had to coordinate with our Air Traffic Control authority-I lose track of governmental renamings-so that they could advise aircraft pilots to stay above a certain altitude, in that area, during the allocated training period.

The Germans learned that the soviets were a damn sight better at it than the luftwaffe.

i liked this video a lot because i played il2 very much

Were these ideas about the use of airpower and how they were supposed to work in concert with the ground forces already in place at the start of the war against the USSR (Barbarossa '41)? Or did the the ideas about how to effectively use airpower against the invading German armies undergo radical changes in the wake of the initial string of defeats of 1941-1942 and Soviet Air Force suffering badly.

3:26 Should have been the thumbnail.

according to western historian version , written by german historian based on the magically found diary of a german soldier . soviet IL-2 did not have any impact on the war at all , they were always destroyed by german fighter and AA, and never hit german ground target. however the soviet is keep making IL-2 untill 50.000 unit and they were all destroyed by german and never hit a single ground target . german get bored of the war and they lose the war

Cheers from the Pacific West Coast of Canada.

It sounds great, that it begs a question why Red Army with so many great ground attack aircraft, good artillery and countless tanks had such poor performance though the war? Most aircraft and tanks didn't have radio, nor most units on the ground, beside initial stages of major battles, the reconnaissance was next to nothing.

I will always be fascinated by ww2 German and Soviet machines and tactics.

Interesting

The Germans actually did an effective job of keeping the Soviet air force in check till the end. More then a few German Generals and commanders that served in the East found out that wasn't the casein the West after the British and American close in Fighter bomber units tore their units pieces. The only way passed divisions could service is heavily camouflage their units and only move at night. This was never the case in Russia.

It’s surprising you didn’t know that commanders assign artillery and aircraft their own air space to operate in. That is very common and one of the first things artillery officers and close air support officers learn.

Chris: WHY did they do that? 😉

As WW2 Eastern Front air superiority was at best contentious & at worst with the Axis powers,the Soviets seldom tasked units to be far into enemy areas.

More relevant would be, what the Soviet Airforce learned from the Luftwaffe about close air support.

*Always expect the Unexpected ........ if you're going to watch this channel* Unusual & very interesting - And as you emphasis, a great antidote to the jingoistic dogma 'Russia just swamps folk'

I think on some level the Soviets decided it was better to lose men and machines in destroying equipment on the tactical level, which also destroyed crews of artillery/tanks etc. than to lose them in strategic bombing which had very uncertain results especially with protected factories.

Good video……..this break down in era field security will be investigated by SMERCh.

Taktikkommentar

If Germany had thrown away pilots like the Soviets did, they would have run out of air power in weeks.

I don't know about the Soviet air force, but correct me if I'm wrong AFAIK the Luftwaffe had no /strategic/ ability and were only envisaged as a /tactical/ support for the army. Hence they struggled over long distances like the Eastern Front and over Britain.

Subtle Russian engineering, as usual. Bolt together a ground attack aircraft which is essentially a tank with wings. No frills, just functional.

Usa owns the sky china catching up

I know your books, your conclusions are are wrong. -Capt. Marco Ramius.

it's funny that both German and Russian used Airforce to enhance the army were as the US fought for place aka no getting along😢

The Stuka as it evolved into the -D & -G series was actually better than the IL-2, just that the Soviets made so many of the latter with overwhelming air superiority by the time they were widely deployed, they have assumed mythological status. To gain a realistic operational perspective, suggest reading a (auto-) bio of an operational IL-2 pilot or two. I'm reading from the perspective of professional pilot all of my life, prev. mil. Their relatively poor airframe and engine performance, method of sighting and ordnance delivery and low load carrying capacity of the IL-2 will surprise you. I had always thought they carried a far greater operational payload. However what the IL-2 did have to survivability advantage was a heavily armoured bathtub for the crew. That said, the poor old Ju 87 has received a disproportionate bum rap from a single battle, Luftschalcht um England were they were ill deployed in a quasi-strategic bombing role, e.g. attacking radar towers, whilst up against one of the best defensive fighters of its day in extremely adverse operational circumstances. In the Med, Middle East & Soviet Union and prior campaigns in Western Europe, they performed their task superbly as well as could be expected of any relatively slow tactical ground interdiction purposed type. From what I've read from Heer & Waffen SS sources in theatre with them at the time, the Ju-87 was greatly admired and appreciated by them whenever they had them in direct support. Very very accurate "flying artillery". Sadly, much like the T-34/76 & T34/85 vs Pzkpfw IV L/43 & L/ 48 armed F2 and models on & Panthers numerical disparity, never was the Ju-87 (6000) available in the kind of numbers the IL-2 (36,000) was.

I always thought that they were all about numbers and overkill! More so than tactics!

This guy really adds a lot of drama?Solds like its all WESTERN propaganda.Whats he trying out for an acting debut????????????

Why? Because that is the tech tree they went down in Hearts of Iron 4.

Tuosta nopeasti puhutusta englanninkielestä ei saa mitään selvää, kuin vain yksittäisiä sanoja. Onneksi mun poikani neuvoi, miten siihen saa tekstityksen.

From the time of the czar until today the Russian/Soviet doctrine has been centered around the artillery forces. The introduction of the IL-2 was to destroy the panzer forces more efficiently than the artillery. Russians still have no effective close air support doctrine.

14:45 - that’s something that seems unchanged from by Soviet to Russian Army forces. Not considering enemy airforces may try to interdict larger Front-level supply depots 50km+ from the front. It been clear in Ukraine that Russian Army logistics wasn’t prepared for Ukrainian Airforces capable of precision strikes that deep. Once the “Plan” had suppressed air interdiction at that range minimal or ineffective air-defence operated at these locations. Once Ukraine’s AF had enough US supplied limited range GMLRS stocks (range 84 km) they began destroying these sites. When they had longer range NATO missiles, some air launched and larger domestic drones they targeted the railhead dumps. Lack of Russian palletization, inadequate air-defense and good intelligence combined with unexpected precision showed this method of local / temporary air superiority is no match for high accuracy strategic strikes. The VKS are performing to plan, Army logistics are very efficiently moving supplies 1,000 km by rail, but in the occupied territories the amount of small truck transfer (more trucks than they have), manual loading and inadequate air cover over massive multiple fronts is causing problems. Basically an inadequately equipped Russian Federation Army is falling short trying to execute a massive Soviet Combined Arms support plan.

ok

CAS is king.

please stop it with the silly playing on the lens thing you do in the intro

The way you've been starting your videos recently with a random unnecessary closeup/ checking focus etc is really off putting to me. I get that it's for stylistic reasons but it just comes across as sloppy and unprofessional to me, which given the serious subject matter of your videos, is very jarring.

Talking to the camera like it is actually your audience and is capable of interacting with you isn't good for your mental health. There have been studies.

Very controversial airplane. (I think it’s total garbage). Underpowered, crappy visibility forward and down (so important for an attack plane), small payload (Underpowered), bad gun sights, no bomb sight, can’t dive bomb.

Wow only 2k views, fell off.

For those who think they know about the military strategy and tactics of the command of the Red Army - there is not and there was no strategy and tactics. The law of force was applied - the more soldiers, the better. Losses were not taken into account at all. And this also applied to aviation - airplanes were built from plywood and steel. More pieces are better.

what they learned is that they start coming and they dont stop coming.

Los alemanes nunca aprendieron ,repitieron, sólo que está vez, Not quedara ni uno para Contar la historia....

This guy is outstanding. German depth.